Out of curiosity, what would it take?

[SqueakyClean]

I admit that I don't get too much into these political discussions. I try to stay neutral and stick to facts and research both sides of a story.

The last 20 hours have seen a rash of new information released which has furthered the political frenzy. It's just yet another stepping stone in this whole drama for us to bicker back and forth about. At this time, the future is still fairly open and I honestly do not know how it will end.

I don't like Trump and I didn't vote for him. That doesn't mean that I can't recognize some of the things that he has done that have helped the country. At the same time, his behavior and rhetoric are well below what my expectations are for the leader of our people. Most people understand that, but his supporters believe that the actual results he has produced outweigh the daily drama being splayed across the media.

So here's the question: What would it take for true Trump supporters to turn on him? Trump said during one of his rallies that he could go and shoot someone on 5th avenue and it wouldn't affect his numbers. While this statement is obviously in jest, I would hopefully assume that if that situation were actually to occur, say, a video of Trump pulling out a gun and shooting an unarmed American man on the street, even most of his die-hard supporters would say that is beyond what a President is allowed to do. Right?

What would it take? If incontrovertible proof came out that Trump coordinated with WikiLeaks to release Hillary's emails to try and stem the negative tide of the Access Hollywood tape, would that be enough of an illegal act to make you say that it outweighs the potential gains to the country?

If absolute proof came out that Trump did know about the Trump Tower Meeting beforehand, regardless of whether any information was actually given, would that mean anything to you? This is not a crime, but it would be a case where Trump looked the country straight in the face and lied about it.

If it turns out that he was siphoning money from his campaign finances to help build a new hotel in Tokyo. would that sway the needle?

These are all purely hypothetical and I don't want this to devolve into an argument of what he has already done. I am also VERY aware that past presidents / candidates are probably just as slimy and very well have gotten away with actions that are just as bad. My personal belief is that if you break the law, you go to jail, regardless of your political leanings. I have no doubt that if the Mueller team were to spend as much time and effort on Hillary's campaign, he would come up with several cases of illegal activity and I would be absolutely fine with those people being punished accordingly.

I just want to know, what would Trump have to do (or have done since he became president) to warrant a true supporter to say "enough is enough".

 

[miksta]

subscribed

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

proof that he conspired to do putin's bidding in exchange for help with the election. I don't care about hooker payments or manafort. They aren't ideal, but it's not worth removing a president over it. The good thing about the US is you can ditch the jerks after 4 years. In the meantime, I'm actually pretty happy with most of his policies, other than the wall...but I agree with the premise of needing secure borders.

 

[gr8indoorsman]

I think some number of Trump supporters will never turn on him because they will always be able to fall back on "But Obama" or "But Hillary...". Their minds are not objective; it is always a direct comparison to someone else whom they loathe. Thus, it creates a false lesser of two (or three) evils scenario with which they can justify just about anything Trump does. We've seen that play out here a number of times in the last two years.

 

[Purdue4Life]

Trump said he could murder someone in the street and his base wouldn't turn against him. He's doing his best to prove that.

 

[SqueakyClean]

Trump said he could murder someone in the street and his base wouldn't turn against him. He's doing his best to prove that.

That's the point though. Topsecret Boiler's response is exactly what I was looking for. I am curious what that line is with people. Is Gr8indoorsman right in that there will be some people that there is absolutely no line that can be crossed that would make them change their minds? I am sure there are a few, but 99% of conservatives / Republicans / Trump Voters (of which all three of those are technically three potential different groups) are quite normal people who are able to look at things from a normal perspective (Unfortunately, it's the 1% that are the loudest and seem to be in a constant screaming match with the corresponding 1% from the other side).

There are likely Trump voters out there who have already seen enough and have already changed their opinion. I am sure that there are also people out there who did not vote for him, but actually like him better now (likely less than the first, but I am sure some do exist).

I am just curious to see the responses. I am not trying to prove any kind of agenda. I guess what I am more looking for is seeing how people prioritize what's important to them. Is lying more egregious than campaign finance violations? Is infidelity more important than potential foreign political collusion? I am not trying to argue one way or the other that Trump is guilty of these items, just more curious as to how they rank in his supporter's minds.

 

[Scheffler90]

It would take an act of betrayal for many supporters to dump on him. By betrayal, I mean something they invested a lot of trust in him doing that he does a complete 180 on. I think if he went soft on border security, that would be a start. I think Ann Coulter has said that would be death for Trump...to back off the wall and "the ban".

If not a betrayal, then a line that is just one step too far. It can't just be something that people have already "baked-in" to his support...cheating on wives, paying mistresses, lying, saying outrageous things, etc.... It would have to be something that would be "a bridge too far". Last year I was speaking to a conservative evangelical leader in the southwest when I basically posed a similar question...his answer "I can deal with the women and the lying (somewhat), but one automatic disqualification would be if he paid for an abortion for one of his mistresses. I would go from staunch supporter to his worst enemy in a flash".

 

[Purdue97]

I admit that I don't get too much into these political discussions. I try to stay neutral and stick to facts and research both sides of a story.

The last 20 hours have seen a rash of new information released which has furthered the political frenzy. It's just yet another stepping stone in this whole drama for us to bicker back and forth about. At this time, the future is still fairly open and I honestly do not know how it will end.

I don't like Trump and I didn't vote for him. That doesn't mean that I can't recognize some of the things that he has done that have helped the country. At the same time, his behavior and rhetoric are well below what my expectations are for the leader of our people. Most people understand that, but his supporters believe that the actual results he has produced outweigh the daily drama being splayed across the media.

So here's the question: What would it take for true Trump supporters to turn on him? Trump said during one of his rallies that he could go and shoot someone on 5th avenue and it wouldn't affect his numbers. While this statement is obviously in jest, I would hopefully assume that if that situation were actually to occur, say, a video of Trump pulling out a gun and shooting an unarmed American man on the street, even most of his die-hard supporters would say that is beyond what a President is allowed to do. Right?

What would it take? If incontrovertible proof came out that Trump coordinated with WikiLeaks to release Hillary's emails to try and stem the negative tide of the Access Hollywood tape, would that be enough of an illegal act to make you say that it outweighs the potential gains to the country?

If absolute proof came out that Trump did know about the Trump Tower Meeting beforehand, regardless of whether any information was actually given, would that mean anything to you? This is not a crime, but it would be a case where Trump looked the country straight in the face and lied about it.

If it turns out that he was siphoning money from his campaign finances to help build a new hotel in Tokyo. would that sway the needle?

These are all purely hypothetical and I don't want this to devolve into an argument of what he has already done. I am also VERY aware that past presidents / candidates are probably just as slimy and very well have gotten away with actions that are just as bad. My personal belief is that if you break the law, you go to jail, regardless of your political leanings. I have no doubt that if the Mueller team were to spend as much time and effort on Hillary's campaign, he would come up with several cases of illegal activity and I would be absolutely fine with those people being punished accordingly.

I just want to know, what would Trump have to do (or have done since he became president) to warrant a true supporter to say "enough is enough".

If it turned out he colluded and planned the cyber attacks with or in coordination with Russia to influence election my guess is most would want him gone. His son meeting with the Russian lawyer looks bad but there is enough gray area around it to likely not amount to much.

So this current stuff about tax evasion, and Trump paying hookers/escorts to stay quiet is not good, but it is also old. Basically it is stating that Trump has less than ideal morals, especially when it comes to woman. The guy is an a--hole. People, this is not exactly new news. And when collusion/conspiracy/treason were all but promised much of it falls flat.

 

[Purdue97]

That's the point though. Topsecret Boiler's response is exactly what I was looking for. I am curious what that line is with people. Is Gr8indoorsman right in that there will be some people that there is absolutely no line that can be crossed that would make them change their minds? I am sure there are a few, but 99% of conservatives / Republicans / Trump Voters (of which all three of those are technically three potential different groups) are quite normal people who are able to look at things from a normal perspective (Unfortunately, it's the 1% that are the loudest and seem to be in a constant screaming match with the corresponding 1% from the other side).

There are likely Trump voters out there who have already seen enough and have already changed their opinion. I am sure that there are also people out there who did not vote for him, but actually like him better now (likely less than the first, but I am sure some do exist).

I am just curious to see the responses. I am not trying to prove any kind of agenda. I guess what I am more looking for is seeing how people prioritize what's important to them. Is lying more egregious than campaign finance violations? Is infidelity more important than potential foreign political collusion? I am not trying to argue one way or the other that Trump is guilty of these items, just more curious as to how they rank in his supporter's minds.

Another thing to keep in your mind with what would it take for Trump to be gone in thoughts with conservative/Republican/Trump voters is I think that number outside of Trump voters wanting Trump gone is higher than you think.

-Trump is not conservative or a Republican but more of a populist.

-If Trump hypothetically leaves, Pence would be in charge. I can all but guarantee conservatives would prefer Pence as would many Republicans. I do not agree with Pence on a good portion of his views. That said, I would welcome the stability and professional behavior/etiquette he would bring to the office.

 

[Scheffler90]

If it turned out he colluded and planned the cyber attacks with or in coordination with Russia to influence election my guess is most would want him gone. His son meeting with the Russian lawyer looks bad but there is enough gray area around it to likely not amount to much.

So this current stuff about tax evasion, and Trump paying hookers/escorts to stay quiet is not good, but it is also old. Basically it is stating that Trump has less than ideal morals, especially when it comes to woman. The guy is an a--hole. People, this is not exactly new news. And when collusion/conspiracy/treason were all but promised much of it falls flat.

Good answer. I think it's possible we may fall into a more grey zone related to Russia. Let's say Stone did infact coordinate with Russia GRU/Wikileaks to release the data, but it's not clear Trump was aware of the specifics, but maybe was told that Stone was "working with Russians"? That would indicate the CAMPAIGN colluded/conspired, but TRUMP personally didn’t, at least not in any active way. I think that is a possible outcome, though not yet proven. Not sure how people would decide to support/oppose Trump in that case.

 

[Purdue97]

I think some number of Trump supporters will never turn on him because they will always be able to fall back on "But Obama" or "But Hillary...". Their minds are not objective; it is always a direct comparison to someone else whom they loathe. Thus, it creates a false lesser of two (or three) evils scenario with which they can justify just about anything Trump does. We've seen that play out here a number of times in the last two years.

With all due respect, I think you misinterpret some of those explanations/rationalizations. I do not see many, if any people saying Trump is not responsible for his actions. Admittedly, I do read all posts/threads here so I may have missed them. It is more of a did he do what is alleged in many cases. Big difference.

Not sure one can say it is a false lesser of two evils, because that was exactly how many decided their vote. So in this case that would not make it false. That said, unless one was willing to put a vote to a third party, there were two poor choices. It is not used to justify his actions, but their vote.

My hope was if a third party could get the 10%(maybe 5%?) required vote for money it would force the two main parties to clean up their act a bit. My vote was a bit short this time around.

As for Trump in the future I would hope that he does not win the Republican primary. That said, there needs to be a strong but professional candidate to go against him, and know how to deal with his behavior on stage/in elections, or he makes them look stupid. That said, if he wins the Republican primary and he runs against someone like Bernie(admitted socialist) or Warren and her push to move companies to a type of nationalization, sure, it becomes voting for the lesser of the perceived evils.

 

[hunkgolden]

I admit that I don't get too much into these political discussions. I try to stay neutral and stick to facts and research both sides of a story.

The last 20 hours have seen a rash of new information released which has furthered the political frenzy. It's just yet another stepping stone in this whole drama for us to bicker back and forth about. At this time, the future is still fairly open and I honestly do not know how it will end.

I don't like Trump and I didn't vote for him. That doesn't mean that I can't recognize some of the things that he has done that have helped the country. At the same time, his behavior and rhetoric are well below what my expectations are for the leader of our people. Most people understand that, but his supporters believe that the actual results he has produced outweigh the daily drama being splayed across the media.

So here's the question: What would it take for true Trump supporters to turn on him? Trump said during one of his rallies that he could go and shoot someone on 5th avenue and it wouldn't affect his numbers. While this statement is obviously in jest, I would hopefully assume that if that situation were actually to occur, say, a video of Trump pulling out a gun and shooting an unarmed American man on the street, even most of his die-hard supporters would say that is beyond what a President is allowed to do. Right?

What would it take? If incontrovertible proof came out that Trump coordinated with WikiLeaks to release Hillary's emails to try and stem the negative tide of the Access Hollywood tape, would that be enough of an illegal act to make you say that it outweighs the potential gains to the country?

If absolute proof came out that Trump did know about the Trump Tower Meeting beforehand, regardless of whether any information was actually given, would that mean anything to you? This is not a crime, but it would be a case where Trump looked the country straight in the face and lied about it.

If it turns out that he was siphoning money from his campaign finances to help build a new hotel in Tokyo. would that sway the needle?

These are all purely hypothetical and I don't want this to devolve into an argument of what he has already done. I am also VERY aware that past presidents / candidates are probably just as slimy and very well have gotten away with actions that are just as bad. My personal belief is that if you break the law, you go to jail, regardless of your political leanings. I have no doubt that if the Mueller team were to spend as much time and effort on Hillary's campaign, he would come up with several cases of illegal activity and I would be absolutely fine with those people being punished accordingly.

I just want to know, what would Trump have to do (or have done since he became president) to warrant a true supporter to say "enough is enough".

What has he done as President that would make anyone not support him?

 

[BoilerJS]

I admit that I don't get too much into these political discussions. I try to stay neutral and stick to facts and research both sides of a story.

The last 20 hours have seen a rash of new information released which has furthered the political frenzy. It's just yet another stepping stone in this whole drama for us to bicker back and forth about. At this time, the future is still fairly open and I honestly do not know how it will end..

Further confirms my thoughts that the FBI has become way to political. A political frenzy caused by FBI findings of someone, not even holding public office, accused of tax evasion and lying to a bank to get a loan.

 

[atmafola]

It would take an act of betrayal for many supporters to dump on him. By betrayal, I mean something they invested a lot of trust in him doing that he does a complete 180 on. I think if he went soft on border security, that would be a start. I think Ann Coulter has said that would be death for Trump...to back off the wall and "the ban".

If not a betrayal, then a line that is just one step too far. It can't just be something that people have already "baked-in" to his support...cheating on wives, paying mistresses, lying, saying outrageous things, etc.... It would have to be something that would be "a bridge too far". Last year I was speaking to a conservative evangelical leader in the southwest when I basically posed a similar question...his answer "I can deal with the women and the lying (somewhat), but one automatic disqualification would be if he paid for an abortion for one of his mistresses. I would go from staunch supporter to his worst enemy in a flash".

I am 100% certain that evangelical leader is lying!

 

[gr8indoorsman]

With all due respect, I think you misinterpret some of those explanations/rationalizations. I do not see many, if any people saying Trump is not responsible for his actions. Admittedly, I do read all posts/threads here so I may have missed them. It is more of a did he do what is alleged in many cases. Big difference.

Not sure one can say it is a false lesser of two evils, because that was exactly how many decided their vote. So in this case that would not make it false. That said, unless one was willing to put a vote to a third party, there were two poor choices. It is not used to justify his actions, but their vote.

My hope was if a third party could get the 10%(maybe 5%?) required vote for money it would force the two main parties to clean up their act a bit. My vote was a bit short this time around.

As for Trump in the future I would hope that he does not win the Republican primary. That said, there needs to be a strong but professional candidate to go against him, and know how to deal with his behavior on stage/in elections, or he makes them look stupid. That said, if he wins the Republican primary and he runs against someone like Bernie(admitted socialist) or Warren and her push to move companies to a type of nationalization, sure, it becomes voting for the lesser of the perceived evils.

It is a false lesser of two evils because Clinton and Obama are no longer relevant. They aren’t the President; they aren’t running for President. Of course those comparisons were relevant when deciding between Hillary or Trump or someone else, but we aren’t making that choice any longer and never will again.

 

[miksta]

It is a false lesser of two evils because Clinton and Obama are no longer relevant. They aren’t the President; they aren’t running for President. Of course those comparisons were relevant when deciding between Hillary or Trump or someone else, but we aren’t making that choice any longer and never will again.

They'll have their new suite of boogeymen/women soon enough.